linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 05/10] drm/fourcc: Add DRM_FORMAT

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20220314170539.17400f93@eldfell>
Date:   Mon, 14 Mar 2022 17:05:39 +0200
From:   Pekka Paalanen <ppaalanen@...il.com>
To:     Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
Cc:     Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>,
        Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>,
        Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>,
        David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
        Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@...hat.com>,
        Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>, Helge Deller <deller@....de>,
        Linux Fbdev development list <linux-fbdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux/m68k <linux-m68k@...r.kernel.org>,
        DRI Development <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 05/10] drm/fourcc: Add DRM_FORMAT_C[124]

On Mon, 14 Mar 2022 14:30:18 +0100
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org> wrote:

> On Mon, Mar 7, 2022 at 9:53 PM Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org> wrote:
> > Introduce fourcc codes for color-indexed frame buffer formats with two,
> > four, and sixteen colors, and provide a mapping from bit per pixel and
> > depth to fourcc codes.
> >
> > As the number of bits per pixel is less than eight, these rely on proper
> > block handling for the calculation of bits per pixel and pitch.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>  
> 
> > --- a/include/uapi/drm/drm_fourcc.h
> > +++ b/include/uapi/drm/drm_fourcc.h
> > @@ -99,7 +99,10 @@ extern "C" {
> >  #define DRM_FORMAT_INVALID     0
> >
> >  /* color index */
> > -#define DRM_FORMAT_C8          fourcc_code('C', '8', ' ', ' ') /* [7:0] C */
> > +#define DRM_FORMAT_C1          fourcc_code('C', '1', ' ', ' ') /* [7:0] C0:C1:C2:C3:C4:C5:C6:C7 1:1:1:1:1:1:1:1 eight pixels/byte */
> > +#define DRM_FORMAT_C2          fourcc_code('C', '2', ' ', ' ') /* [7:0] C0:C1:C2:C3 2:2:2:2 four pixels/byte */
> > +#define DRM_FORMAT_C4          fourcc_code('C', '4', ' ', ' ') /* [7:0] C0:C1 4:4 two pixels/byte */
> > +#define DRM_FORMAT_C8          fourcc_code('C', '8', ' ', ' ') /* [7:0] C 8 one pixel/byte */
> >
> >  /* 8 bpp Red */
> >  #define DRM_FORMAT_R8          fourcc_code('R', '8', ' ', ' ') /* [7:0] R */  
> 
> After replying to Ilia's comment[1], I realized the CFB drawing
> operations use native byte and bit ordering, unless
> FBINFO_FOREIGN_ENDIAN is set.
> While Amiga, Atari, and Sun-3 use big-endian bit ordering,
> e.g. Acorn VIDC[2] uses little endian, and SH7760[3] is configurable
> (sh7760fb configures ordering to match host order).
> BTW, ssd130{7fb,x}_update_rect() both assume little-endian, so I
> guess they are broken on big-endian.
> Fbtest uses big-endian bit ordering, so < 8 bpp is probably broken
> on little-endian.
> 
> Hence the above should become:
> 
>     #define DRM_FORMAT_C1          fourcc_code('C', '1', ' ', ' ') /*
> [7:0] C7:C6:C5:C4:C3:C2:C1:C0 1:1:1:1:1:1:1:1 eight pixels/byte */
>     #define DRM_FORMAT_C2          fourcc_code('C', '2', ' ', ' ') /*
> [7:0] C3:C2:C1:C0 2:2:2:2 four pixels/byte */
>     #define DRM_FORMAT_C4          fourcc_code('C', '4', ' ', ' ') /*
> [7:0] C1:C0 4:4 two pixels/byte */
> 
> The same changes should be made for DRM_FORMAT_[RD][124].
> 
> The fbdev emulation code should gain support for these with and without
> DRM_FORMAT_BIG_ENDIAN, the latter perhaps only on big-endian platforms?
> 
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/r/CAKb7UvgEdm9U=+RyRwL0TGRfA_Qc7NbhCWoZOft2DKdXggtKYw@mail.gmail.com/
> [2] See p.30 of the VIDC datasheet
>     http://chrisacorns.computinghistory.org.uk/docs/Acorn/Misc/Acorn_VIDC_Datasheet.pdf
> [3] See p.1178 of the SH7660 datasheet
>     https://datasheet.octopart.com/HD6417760BL200AV-Renesas-datasheet-14105759.pdf

Hi Geert,

why would CPU endianess affect the order of bits in a byte?

Do you mean that bit 0 one machine is (1 << 0), and on another machine
bit 0 is (1 << 7)?

In C, we have only one way to address bits of a byte and that is with
arithmetic. You cannot take the address of a bit any other way, can you?

Can we standardise on "bit n of a byte is addressed as (1 << n)"?

I don't mind in which order the pixels are inside a byte, as long as it
doesn't change by CPU endianess. If you need both directions, then use
two different drm_fourcc codes that do not change their meaning by CPU
endianess. Just like we have XRGB and BGRX formats.

I would not like to see DRM_FORMAT_BIG_ENDIAN used for this, it would
conflate a whole new concept into the mess that is little- vs.
big-endian.


Thanks,
pq

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped